First off, morality is not to be confused with legality.
As taxes are of dubious moral character in the first place, it can hardly be said to be immoral if one evades them (although I would advise against it). In fact, one could argue that crimes against the state - which include tax offences other than lying but the top of which is treason - have no standing in moral terms.
The law can often be immoral - not so much taxes (unlawful evasion is not worth the trouble), but other laws that I would break that are not applicable to the UK (compulsory military service - I would refuse the oath) or have broken in other jurisdictions (e.g. crossing the road on a red man).
PS you mean who's not whose; mind your apostrophes.
I see that you feel the need to exert your definition of taxation. That is your opinion of taxation.
Ah, but all that 'society' and 'democracy' do is to provide a veneer of legitimacy for mob rule. That's all that society is at its core, a mob. Society is a very poorly defined concept, and before you ask I do not consider myself to be a member. It also works out as some semi-accountable politicians primarily looking after their own electorate first and others second (I am just about old enough to remember that
Would you care to define the "common good"? I would say that it is so poorly defined that there is no such thing. I say that ideally no-one should make the sacrifice unless they want to, if it can't be done by charity then it isn't worth doing. Then again, tax-funded schemes do have one use - I can use them to justify less charitable giving than I would otherwise do. In fact, studies have shown that higher taxes mean less charitable giving.
I also find that private and pseudo-private enterprises are often more effective at delivering services; one of the reason that the railways have worked so well is that even during the BR era they were pseudo-private, and while I might pay taxes grudgingly I willingly pay train fares, especially since the bylaws help to ensure that everyone is on their best behaviour (or better than they would otherwise). In contrast, the roads are a state-maintained wreck. It's not as though the private sector cannot provide roads.
The problem is that it is hard to ensure accountability when there is a virtually unlimited pot of money alongside powerful 'trade' unions. Anyone who uses the word "pain" to describe the effect of taxes has the wrong word, anger would be more appropriate.
I would say that there is no such thing as Society. There is, however, something known as Government. Even if there was such a thing as Society, I would describe it as being a mob of thieving <illegitimate offspring>, even worse than chuggers and their
And that's before I start ranting about the implications of having state-funded healthcare on the regulation of other aspects of life (to do with healthy/unhealthy activities).
I think the word "offence" should be considered in its wider English Language context, which means that someone else doesn't like but is otherwise (at least directly) unaffected. For things like tax offences and "Society"-level freeloading (avoidance of military service etc.) that is the key word. On taxation, there is a massive gulf between legality and morality.
The first was a hyperbolic quote that I only ever partially agreed with, the second and third are how I view tax bills. I would have no qualms about calling those who dedicate their career to collecting taxes as extortionists to their face.
